• Xbox 360 has 'a lot more than two years' left, MS boss says
    267 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Swiket;36255378]It's a real possibility that the next Xbox console won't be out until 2015 or later, meaning that developers will be working with 10-year-old hardware.[/QUOTE] Last I checked Microsoft and Sony actually wanted a life span of 10 years.
[QUOTE=Matt-;36254417][t]http://s.pro-gmedia.com/videogamer/media/images/pub/misc/masslarge04.jpg[/t][t]http://h8.abload.de/img/crysis_2_pc_xbox_360_v1ncb.jpg[/t][t]http://insidermedia.ign.com/insider/image/article/924/924247/head-to-head-fallout-3-20081027050933305.jpg[/t][t]http://resource.mmgn.com/Gallery/full/BF3-Xbox-360-HD-vs-Xbox-360-SD-vs-PC-1041428DQC.jpg[/t] how can they not tell the fucking difference.[/QUOTE] who cares? if they can make interesting games, why not continue with the current user-base they've already established? maybe i'm jaded or stuck-up but i really couldn't care if the same shoot-you-in-the-face simulator with gameplay dating back from 2003 has x8 AA instead of x4.
games are constantly being affected by the x360 bullshit, like for example how in ME3 features got cut just because the 360 didn't have enough memory. That's also the reason why so many games have so blurry textures etc. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spA3VOWD33M[/media]
[QUOTE=thisispain;36256658]who cares? if they can make interesting games, why not continue with the current user-base they've already established? maybe i'm jaded or stuck-up but i really couldn't care if the same shoot-you-in-the-face simulator with gameplay dating back from 2003 has x8 AA instead of x4.[/QUOTE] it's not just about the graphics dude. it's about the content of the game. games are being held back by the limited hardware of the consoles and they will continue to be until consoles get some more horsepower.
[QUOTE=Antdawg;36255691]The funny thing though is that if you took the captions off of the Mass Effect and Fallout ones it might actually be a bit hard to tell which is which. The 360 has aged very well and new releases on it can still look amazing for the old hardware it runs on.[/QUOTE] It's aged well cause there aren't many devs willing to put in WORK on a PC centric version of any game.
[QUOTE=God of Ashes;36256687]it's not just about the graphics dude. it's about the content of the game. games are being held back by the limited hardware of the consoles[/QUOTE] except no not really. if anything it's the stupid publishers/vultures who destroy any hope for new gameplay because they hope the next installment of Face-Killer with improved graphics will hit the top sales chart.
[QUOTE=Arvuti;36256660]games are constantly being affected by the x360 bullshit, like for example how in ME3 features got cut just because the 360 didn't have enough memory. That's also the reason why so many games have so blurry textures etc. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spA3VOWD33M[/media][/QUOTE] More like it's lazy developers not bothering to alter their textures for the platform.
[QUOTE=markg06;36256721]More like it's lazy developers not bothering to alter their textures for the platform.[/QUOTE] not to mention higher textures go to waste on a platform which most people play on lower-DPI TV's. 35" at 1280×720 which equals ~41 pixels per inch compare that to the DPI of my laptop monitor, 17"'s at 1400x1050 which equals ~102 pixels per inch ~oops, actually i'm on a 14 inch screen which is 125 pixels per inch.
[QUOTE=God of Ashes;36256687]it's not just about the graphics dude. it's about the content of the game. games are being held back by the limited hardware of the consoles and they will continue to be until consoles get some more horsepower.[/QUOTE] I doubt AAA games are suddenly going to be more deep and sophisticated because of graphics update. You could have the best graphics in the world and publishers would still demand to stick to the content formula that sells well, just with more bling and more realistic 'splosions and destruction physics this time. I personally laughed at the comparison screenshots from above because aside from lighting I don't see much of a difference there, and certainly wouldn't notice it ingame. I'm all for pushing hardware limitations, it's the natural progression of the medium you can't stop anyway, but I think MS can keep the xbox 360 breathing for a long time, especially with peripherals that are the latest craze.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/pI30C.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Antdawg;36255691]The funny thing though is that if you took the captions off of the Mass Effect and Fallout ones it might actually be a bit hard to tell which is which. [B]The 360 has aged very well [/B]and new releases on it can still look amazing for the old hardware it runs on.[/QUOTE] No, it really, REALLY hasn't. New releases look decent on it but only because they are pushing the console to it's absolutely limits and devs are now forced to render mostly on the cpu instead of the gpu. You shouldn't be using a cpu as a gpu.
[QUOTE=mysteryman;36256864]devs are now forced to render mostly on the cpu instead of the gpu.[/QUOTE] you should read up on the difference between a CPU and a GPU... seriously
[QUOTE=killerjak7;36256807][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/pI30C.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]I remember reading that the 360 pic was from an old build.
[QUOTE=Matt-;36254417][t]http://s.pro-gmedia.com/videogamer/media/images/pub/misc/masslarge04.jpg[/t][t]http://h8.abload.de/img/crysis_2_pc_xbox_360_v1ncb.jpg[/t][t]http://insidermedia.ign.com/insider/image/article/924/924247/head-to-head-fallout-3-20081027050933305.jpg[/t][t]http://resource.mmgn.com/Gallery/full/BF3-Xbox-360-HD-vs-Xbox-360-SD-vs-PC-1041428DQC.jpg[/t] how can they not tell the fucking difference.[/QUOTE] The problem with this comparison is, resolution is downplayed. What should be done to properly compare is take a PC screenshot at 1920x1080, and stretch the 360 one from it's original resolution to 1920x1080. Before you say it's unfair, when you are actually playing the games they all are stretched over the same 20"/40"/whatever surface, what happens when images are so small is that the difference in resolution is less visible (stretch them over a 30" screen and you'll see). Hence why the comparison screenshots rarely capture the horrid blurryness (most) console games have.
Even my mobile phone has more RAM than X360.
[QUOTE=acds;36256910]The problem with this comparison is, resolution is downplayed. What should be done to properly compare is take a PC screenshot at 1920x1080, and stretch the 360 one from it's original resolution to 1920x1080. Before you say it's unfair, when you are actually playing the games they all are stretched over the same 20"/40"/whatever surface, what happens when images are so small is that the difference in resolution is less visible (stretch them over a 30" screen and you'll see). Hence why the comparison screenshots rarely capture the horrid blurryness (most) console games have.[/QUOTE] that has to do with the screen. a HDTV at 40" is never going to be as sharp as a monitor because monitors will show a lot more pixels per inch. play a 360 game on a monitor with 720p as its native resolution, and it will look like that. games aren't stretched across a surface, that's not how it works.
[QUOTE=killerjak7;36256807][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/pI30C.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Not really a relevant comparison, given that one is shot in a wide open space with inherently sparse foliage and the other is shot in the middle of a jungle
[QUOTE=Maloof?;36257081]Not really a relevant comparison, given that one is shot in a wide open space with inherently sparse foliage and the other is shot in the middle of a jungle[/QUOTE] Look at the level layout. I'm pretty sure it's the same part of the game but a lot of the trees have been removed to cope with the reduced power of the 360.
[QUOTE=Juggernog;36257100]Look at the level layout. I'm pretty sure it's the same part of the game but a lot of the trees have been removed to cope with the reduced power of the 360.[/QUOTE] Not to mention the lighting looks awful in the 360 picture
[QUOTE=latin_geek;36254512]How can their customers disagree when they're having a massive increase in sales compared to other consoles[/QUOTE]Probably because they don't really have a choice. If you want a Microsoft console, Xbox 360 is the only choice. Besides, how many soccer mums buying their son a Xbox 360 with Call of Duty everyday? They don't complain about the console since they don't know any better about it.
[QUOTE=thisispain;36256962]that has to do with the screen. a HDTV at 40" is never going to be as sharp as a monitor because monitors will show a lot more pixels per inch. play a 360 game on a monitor with 720p as its native resolution, and it will look like that. games aren't stretched across a surface, that's not how it works.[/QUOTE] I know they don't really stretch, but small images hide the huge difference that resolution makes (also because I doubt anyone plays on a 720p screen, and a 720p TV, assuming it's not tiny, will have a very low PPI).
[QUOTE=acds;36257152]I know they don't really stretch, but small images hide the huge difference that resolution makes.[/QUOTE] of course but it would be ridiculous to adjust the image based on the TV rather than the platform since you're not looking at the picture for that reason. and plenty of people play on a 720p screen lol. lots and lots of HDTV's are 720p simply because they used to be cheaper than a 1080p model.
Seems Microsoft dosen't learn from the mistakes of Atari. When pac-man got released for the 2600 part of the reason it got panned by critics is because the hardware just couldn't match what was in the arcade at the time. Replace Arcade with PC and 2600 with 360 and we have a walking disaster waiting to happen. All we need now is a game.
Well, I agree that most games run pretty stable on the 360. But the hardware is like really outdated. The xbox has only 512 MB Ram which is pretty ridiculous. I sometimes wonder how the devs manage to run games with such limited power. I hope the new consoles will have more power than the 360 did on release, even 512 MB Ram was nothing in 2004. So I really hope that the hardware will already be more advanced for the new release so that we can keep the consoles for a longer time and that it will be able to run games that will come out in the future. I sometimes really hate how games on the 360 have this low fps/lag in some games. Although it is often the cause of the devs for having an unoptimized engine.
[QUOTE=thisispain;36256897]you should read up on the difference between a CPU and a GPU... seriously[/QUOTE] what i'm saying is you should not leave the gpu's job to the cpu, which is pretty much what devs are doing for most new xbox games. [editline]9th June 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=thisispain;36256962]that has to do with the screen. a HDTV at 40" is never going to be as sharp as a monitor because monitors will show a lot more pixels per inch. play a 360 game on a monitor with 720p as its native resolution, and it will look like that. games aren't stretched across a surface, that's not how it works.[/QUOTE] It's all about scaling, bro. So yeah, unless you are playing on a 720 screen, expect horrendous scaling. Same applies for older pc games that weren't around when 1920x1080 was a norm.
Am I the only one who's happy with this? I don't want to hear about xbox anymore ps3/wii u and pc are the best "consoles" that you can have.
[QUOTE=7331;36257812]Am I the only one who's happy with this? I don't want to hear about xbox anymore ps3/[b]wii u[/b] and pc are the best "consoles" that you can have.[/QUOTE] Pretty sure Nintendo aren't going to be boasting the hardware of it.
[QUOTE=Intoxicated Spy;36254071]12? its 7[/QUOTE] Oops. Still fucking old.
[QUOTE=7331;36257812]Am I the only one who's happy with this? I don't want to hear about xbox anymore ps3/wii u and pc are the best "consoles" that you can have.[/QUOTE] You're happy that a 7 year old console will continue to hold back gaming for the rest of us? Awesome. Xbox is the most prominent console right now as it's been out for so long and has been made afforable. When devs are making a game they tend to focus more on developing on xbox as it's the most accessible and has the largest market. So they develop a game to run on xbox and try to make it look as fantastic as they can, then take that same game and upscale it all and throw it on ps3 and maybe pc if we're lucky. Ps3 and PC owners get the short end of the stick when it comes to developing. This is why i say if devs want to develop on consoles, develop on the ps3 which is like a low end gaming pc spec wise, then downscale it.
I do not get why people always say that the pc doesn't get many games and that consoles do. PC has such a huge amount of constant good releases, there are only a few blockbuster games that are being delayed on pc.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.